Our View: Proceed with caution on Fall River casino plan

Saturday

Feb 1, 2014 at 6:07 PMFeb 2, 2014 at 5:38 PM

The Foxwoods proposal is indeed impressive and could be a game-changer for Fall River, but Fall River must not allow itself to be blinded by this big, shiny proposal; there is much to scrutinize. Let's proceed with caution.

The plan outlined on Tuesday by Fall River Mayor Will Flanagan and officials from Foxwoods Resort Casino for a destination casino in the city has met with both cheers and trepidation around Greater Fall River.

Of course, this isn't Fall River's first time grappling with gambling. A previous proposal, unveiled in Flanagan's first term, fell apart because casino gambling had not been legalized in Massachusetts and the necessary questions had not been answered — significantly, if the casino site proposed for what is now the biopark, was appropriate and legal. After a legal challenge, by the "10 taxpayers" group, a judge ruled that it was not legal, effectively ending Flanagan's first casino quest.

This time around, Flanagan claims to have learned the lessons from his first try at the table — and he's demonstrated that in his initial steps by naming a casino site selection committee of community business and education leaders to locate a site that could house a resort casino with a 140,000-square-foot gambling floor, approximately 20 restaurants, a 350-room hotel, a "name-brand" shopping mall, an entertainment arena, a convention center and a spa.

When it comes to a controversial proposal like this, community buy-in is of utmost importance, not only because it must go to a vote, but because there remain significant concerns surrounding casino gambling and its potential impacts on communities. Voters in Milford rejected a similar proposal by Foxwoods recently.

Granted, the proposal for Fall River is not as large as the Milford proposal, and Milford's economic picture is different than Fall River's. But while everyone understands the need for large-scale economic development and jobs in Fall River, it's still unclear if the casino plan — while impressive — is the best route to take. It is, after all, still a gamble, and all the cards are not yet on the table.

Flanagan said that he wants to create a blueprint for how a community should go about siting a casino. Toward that end, he indicated that the casino agreement for Fall River should include job preferences for Fall River residents, as well as giving preference to local vendors for the complex. That could alleviate some of the concern about the casino diverting money from existing businesses.

Foxwoods itself has a solid track record with its world-class casino in Connecticut, which many local residents have seen for themselves. "Part of what we're doing is to design something that this community can be extremely proud of," Foxwoods CEO Scott Butera said. "Yes, we want to create jobs. Yes, we want to make money. But we also want to create something that when someone opens up their travel guide they say, 'Hey, Fall River, Mass. We gotta go see this place.' That's what we're talking about. We do everything at a five-star and six-star level. Anything else is unacceptable."

For Fall River, the city's potential for significant revenue from the casino, through a host community agreement, could be in "the tens of millions of dollars," according to Flanagan.

The Foxwoods proposal is indeed impressive and could be a game-changer for Fall River, but Fall River must not allow itself to be blinded by this big, shiny proposal; there is much to scrutinize. Let's proceed with caution.

If Flanagan wants to develop a blueprint for how a community should go about siting a casino, he must draw slowly and deliberatively, and include the community in every step before going all in.